p.140 #1 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
zhangyue wrote:
$750 is not cheap by any means. But if it is mint and German edition, grab it, price is up, will up further. Only reason $750 is not cheap because it can be had within $500, undervalued.
from MTF, m should be stronger performer, but have found 50cron r is one of best lens shine both WO and stop down. And I feel R lens have better/relax rendering usually in comparable to similar M, but worse optic raw performance.
Correct! I noticed the price difference when checking out Keh. The reason this lens is $750 is because it is German made (not Canada), and in the utmost mint condition.
p.140 #2 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
uhoh7 wrote:
well how many believed Sony would do a FF nex?
Uh... you did! And quite a few of us. The details of the lens line up might have been a bit murky though!
who ever makes the camera will have a hit, period. Might as well just make it a M mount.
Once upon a time I thought Ricoh was the contender for the throne, but despite the GXR/M, I don't think they have what it takes in them. The GXR/M was largely dated the day it was released. It handled nice and had a quiet shutter, but suffered from a bunch of issues, all of which if they were present in the Sony A7/r cameras would have us in riot mode. I say all this having loved the GXR but it was frustrating too.
Zeiss should just do themselves
This sounds like an argument I used to make. A digital Zeiss Ikon, but somehow better.
Zeiss seem quite content to be a lens maker and I'm pretty content with them being a lens maker too. Even they aren't seemingly upset that the Biogons are difficult on these cameras... it's not a problem, it's an opportunity! New lenses. New sales. Take that Leica. (I didn't say that, Zeiss did).
Anyway I remain pessimistic that anyone other than Sony will be quite this bold, it's just that building E mount cameras with M support across the board is a bridge too far.
p.140 #3 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Sony has done as much as can be done. They have not left it wide open and there is neither an opportunity nor a market for the lenses used and collected by not even .005% of the market. The fact that you can use these lenses on anything other than a Leica, and get higher resolution images at that should be enough to make you happy.
uhoh7 wrote:
The A7s debunk some crucial roadblocks to an affordable M body.
1) no market for a small FF with EVF.
2) 1950s RF lenses are too old to work that great.
Obviously the old glass has no problem whatever with 36mp in the center frame: it's fantastic.
3) nobody cares about the RF glass. In fact never in history have so many cared about it.
The M9 proves edges can be made to work. Now we just have to hope not everyone is asleep. Sony has left the door wide open and all the tech is ready. The market is ready. The sony sensor itself would likely be fine with less on top: and they love to sell to third parties.
And the real ace in hole is footprint: the A7s are barely smaller than the Ms.
Many RF lenses are loved partly because they are tiny. Why do I want an M sized body with a 24 super elmar?
We need to shout it to the rooftops: give us a digital CLE!!! Anyone!! ...Show more →
p.140 #4 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
zhangyue wrote:
I can't set sharpening level with A7 as long as I choose raw, even with Raw_jpeg option turn on. So this is out of question. I can see moire some time, but it also kind of subtle at the time I really need it. So, I bought their FE auto lens for the system just for my need.
it's usually kinda subtle, that's what makes it useful – finer distinctions. it's no easier to see than correct focus with a good OVF (with a good matte screen), except that it is the real focus with the real dof, which makes the end result more accurate (also it's much easier to see in low light).
i kinda doubt the AF in the FE lens will help you much the way you want to shoot. too slow for kids and to difficult to get the focus point where you want it when you want it. lens looks very good otherwise though.
p.140 #5 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
On A mount lenses:
Samuli, you might want to look at A mount 135 STF. A bird told me that Sony created A7r for this lens. You will be happy with the bokeh also.
p.140 #6 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
sebboh wrote:
it's usually kinda subtle, that's what makes it useful – finer distinctions. it's no easier to see than correct focus with a good OVF (with a good matte screen), except that it is the real focus with the real dof, which makes the end result more accurate (also it's much easier to see in low light).
i kinda doubt the AF in the FE lens will help you much the way you want to shoot. too slow for kids and to difficult to get the focus point where you want it when you want it. lens looks very good otherwise though.
Somehow, I have tried as much as I can with EVF, but I never get the speed and keeper both, choose one With current progress I have, it doesn't have the benefit of put subject anywhere in frame and snap. I am slower than recompose.
With OVF(D700), I almost certain I am either in focus or not before even capture. Sure, I might not get 100% focus correct, but most of them can be usable as is. With EVF or LCD, I thought I am in focus, but results are all over the place. This is a mixed bag right now: high pix, extra EVF delay,(mess up my feedback system), no green dot,(for quick guidance) need use to new system and shutter delay: everything add on. I will refrain my comment until I practice more. I am not as efficient with D700 before as well.
One thing for sure: IQ is very high. Color is very beautiful. even with Low color index score in DXO. (6D has low score as well, but in some range, the problem (skin) is very hard to tweak no matter what hue/sat/lum and profile used ) For the IQ itself worth to keep. definitely the best I have seen.
p.140 #7 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
michaelwatkins wrote:
Zeiss seem quite content to be a lens maker and I'm pretty content with them being a lens maker too. Even they aren't seemingly upset that the Biogons are difficult on these cameras... it's not a problem, it's an opportunity! New lenses. New sales. Take that Leica. (I didn't say that, Zeiss did).
Anyway I remain pessimistic that anyone other than Sony will be quite this bold, it's just that building E mount cameras with M support across the board is a bridge too far.
You think? An opportunity to sell 5-6 lenses every time Sony sells a body, and sometimes charge as much or mor than the body? Would you rather sell the razor or the blades? Zeiss gets its. Every time Sony, RED, Arri, Nikon, Canon, Fuji, etc sells a camera, they have an opportunity to sell several lenses. If they focused on making cameras, the opportunity may not be as big. They have the perfect gig going. I wouldn't be surprised if Zeiss made more money than Sony off the A7(r) in the short run.
It does show the diffence in pragmatism among all the photographic players. Sony (with sensors) and Zeiss (with optics) are quite modern and forward thinking. They don't have a non-share policy like some of the other players. Companies like Leica and Nikon are desperately trying to cling onto their historical business model.
p.140 #8 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
BTW, about grip: don't feel it is very comfortable to hold. Vertical portion is too narrow for my hand. With small lens, I think add grip defeat the purpose. With big R lens, it helps but it put abnormal/extra torch on the mount since you now holding it like big camera. The lens no longer point down. And if grab lens, extra body weight also put pressure on the mount.
so deside return it. Hope this helps people interested it.
p.140 #9 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
zhangyue wrote:
One thing for sure: IQ is very high. Color is very beautiful. even with Low color index score in DXO. (6D has low score as well, but in some range, the problem (skin) is very hard to tweak no matter what hue/sat/lum and profile used ) For the IQ itself worth to keep. definitely the best I have seen.
good to hear. not to open this can of worms again, but i wouldn't say it (the color index score) is low, both score better than nearly all non-sony FF cameras. the a7r (78) is one point better than the d800e/d600/d4 and the a7 (82) is one point below the d700. the m9 scores a 76, m240 a 75, and the 6D a 69 btw.
p.140 #10 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
Samuli Vahonen wrote:
I don't see "pushing boundaries" on anything else than overall size/weight. Unless one considers "concept" of "FF mirrorless" pushing boundaries - I don't. Otherwise it's just A99 sensor (in A7r case improved D800E sensor) put to short flange camera body without being able to utilize extreme short flange lenses due to ray angle issues.
michaelwatkins wrote:
Perhaps you are being a little hard on Sony. I'd be upset with them if their cameras did not support Sony's own lenses very well, but clearly that's not the case.
Actually... Since you phrase it like this, I would have to disagree. Clearly there is a dramatic flare problem with the FE35 at night with light sources near the edges or corners, which looks like coma from hell. I guess the cover glass package is just too thick. The same happens with my ZF 35/1.4, so the problem is in the camera.
p.140 #11 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
carstenw wrote:
...which looks like coma from hell...
I tried to figure out name for it, this is definitely much better than my sad tries like "colorful local flare". It will be "coma from hell" in future
p.140 #14 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
carstenw wrote:
Actually... Since you phrase it like this, I would have to disagree. Clearly there is a dramatic flare problem with the FE35 at night with light sources near the edges or corners, which looks like coma from hell. I guess the cover glass package is just too thick. The same happens with my ZF 35/1.4, so the problem is in the camera.
Ken Rockwell noticed the same thing, referred to it as "internal sensor reflections".
I'm definitely feeling like I'm not going to buy any more Sony cameras until they fix this. It can totally ruin night photography.
p.140 #15 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
carstenw wrote:
Actually... Since you phrase it like this, I would have to disagree. Clearly there is a dramatic flare problem with the FE35 at night with light sources near the edges or corners, which looks like coma from hell. I guess the cover glass package is just too thick. The same happens with my ZF 35/1.4, so the problem is in the camera.
It may be... and I'm willing to accept that too but haven't yet run into the issue. Soon though, a couple weeks off looms.
The honeymoon will be over soon enough for most of us. Every camera has issues... but it would be a drag if something like cover glass gets in the way of night photography. Maybe the thread discussing Max Max sensor package modifications will get busier in time here...
p.140 #16 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
I'll probably get flamed to hell for this, but I'm not bothered in the least by cameras having strengths & weaknesses and needing to use different cameras for different situations.
We don't expect the same car to be great on the racetrack and also for taking all the kids to soccer. We don't use the same plane for skydiving and crossing the oceans. We don't even eat the same foods for breakfast and dinner!
Why is it so unexpected that you'd use one camera for sports, another one for landscapes, another one at night, a different one when you want daylight fill flash, and yet a different one to take pictures during a quiet performance?
People who expect one camera that "does it all" will be waiting a long time, I think.
p.140 #17 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
ebrandon wrote:
I'll probably get flamed to hell for this, but I'm not bothered in the least by cameras having strengths & weaknesses and needing to use different cameras for different situations.
We don't expect the same car to be great on the racetrack and also for taking all the kids to soccer. We don't use the same plane for skydiving and crossing the oceans. We don't even eat the same foods for breakfast and dinner!
Why is it so unexpected that you'd use one camera for sports, another one for landscapes, another one at night, a different one when you want daylight fill flash, and yet a different one to take pictures during a quiet performance?
People who expect one camera that "does it all" will be waiting a long time, I think....Show more →
Agree very much with this. The A7 seems to be a camera that does most of what I like to do very well. It's far from perfect but it's very good. I think I'll be happy with this flawed camera. It would be nice to be perfect but it's not realistic.
p.140 #19 · Official: Sony A7 and A7R Fullframe Mirrorless
carstenw wrote:
Actually... Since you phrase it like this, I would have to disagree. Clearly there is a dramatic flare problem with the FE35 at night with light sources near the edges or corners, which looks like coma from hell. I guess the cover glass package is just too thick. The same happens with my ZF 35/1.4, so the problem is in the camera.
Agreed it is in the camera, and it isn't just at night. I got some weird stuff with the Zuiko 21/3.5 and I thought it was the lens. I got a couple crazy examples out of the FE35. It honestly doesn't bother me, though if I wanted something technically better looking I'd probably photoshop the color cast out of the reflection.
